I don't think the Bond dies stuff is a rumor, just something that was put out by a couple of posters here trying to guess what the "big hook" in Bond 25 might be.
I think Bond actually died in Spectre when Blofeld was torturing him and the last part of the film is the deams if a dying man. It's the only way to explain the wildly implausible last 45 minutes of the film. From the business with the watch, to Bond suddenly being able to jump out of the chair, to Bond shooting bad guys at fifty yards without aiming, to the improbable helicopter that's just sitting there so they can make their escape, to the world's biggest explosion, to Bond shooting down a helicopter from four hundred yards with a shot from a Walther PPK to Bond driving off in a perfectly restored DB5 which had been junk just a week or two before.
So, we've already had one cinematic death of Bond.
It says: "Discussions are also believed to be under way with the director and producers of the 25th James Bond film about including the building in the film, which will be released next year. Suggested scenarios are understood to include having Bond land on the roof via parachute or helicopter."
So, I guess if it is a helicopter that can't be the pre-title sequence as they used a helicopter in SPECTRE's.
I could imagine Boyle wanting London as a 'character' in his film. Somewhat dashes some people's hopes of London being a few minutes of M giving Bond his mission and reinforces the view that London will continue to be a major location for Bond25 just as it has been for Skyfall and Spectre. And maybe Boyle is doing a $90 million budget Bond?
I don't think this building is well known outside Britain. Perhaps it will pretend to be somewhere else, like the hotel in "Shanghai" with the pool on top from SF.
I'm very curious as to what they're gonna do with Blofeld. I know some people want a Blofeld-free movie. Not me though, because ending the DC era with no Blofeld (after being kept alive and imprisoned) would seem very odd to me.
However, if B26, 27, and 28 were Nolan directing the Blofeld trilogy, then that would be very nice too.
Blofeld was so underused in Spectre, it was disappointing, especially since they got such a wonderful actor to play the part. That all seems left over from when the film was rumored to be part of a two-film sequence. If they don't finish with Blofeld, the Craig era will seem particularly disconnected.
They were suppose to be building suspense for his entry. In the old films, they built his suspense for 5 films so when you finally saw him it was a big deal. Here he just pops up. the stupid backstory screws over the future of the franchise. taking credit for all the previous villain's hard work screws over the past of the franchise. 25 might be the first Bond im not looking forward to and i have been watching these since i was 7,
They were suppose to be building suspense for his entry. In the old films, they built his suspense for 5 films so when you finally saw him it was a big deal. Here he just pops up. the stupid backstory screws over the future of the franchise. taking credit for all the previous villain's hard work screws over the past of the franchise. 25 might be the first Bond im not looking forward to and i have been watching these since i was 7,
Agree with the stupid backstory....completely unnecessary but I wouldn't worry about it creating problems for Bond 25. New director and screenwriter with very good pedigrees. Lest we not forget, despite the adherence to continuity of the Craig films (Skyfall was a standalone until they decided to connect dots that weren't there in SPECTRE X-( ) Blofeld could easily be out of sight out of mind in Bond 25. I don't see any reason to not give Bond 25 a more than decent chance to be a return to form and worthy entry in the series.
I have little interest in the director, but Sony was narcisistic enough to impose future events onto him. I hope him the best, but am concerned we will get the predictable jail break and Swan revenge.
I have little interest in the director, but Sony was narcisistic enough to impose future events onto him. I hope him the best, but am concerned we will get the predictable jail break and Swan revenge.
I think that they know the whole unified field theory backstory pice was a lead Balloon. My guess and hope is that they leave Blofeld fallow for a while and pick it up with the new Bond.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Yes, sadly, they should leave Blofeld out of the next couple of movies. Bring him back circa 2027. There's no reason he can't be reinvented. Moriarty's been reinvented dozens of times.
I also think Blofeld needs resting, Spectre missed the opportunity with this character and as he was arrested and presumably imprisoned Bond 25 doesn't need to revisit this particular story line. Bringing him back later with a new Bond actor would make it easier to forget the unpopular foster brother story. That is if Bond does continue in its present form with eon?
I also think Blofeld needs resting, Spectre missed the opportunity with this character and as he was arrested and presumably imprisoned Bond 25 doesn't need to revisit this particular story line. Bringing him back later with a new Bond actor would make it easier to forget the unpopular foster brother story. That is if Bond does continue in its present form with eon?
That would make the most sense. EON could always reboot Blofeld/SPECTRE in the 2nd or 3rd film of the new Bond's tenure.
I can't believe some of us are actually discussing Bond dying as an interesting or acceptable story path for the next film. I personally think it's an utterly preposterous idea.
I can't believe some of us are actually discussing Bond dying as an interesting or acceptable story path for the next film. I personally think it's an utterly preposterous idea.
Agreed. But if Craig wants it, you can bet it’s going to happen.
I can't believe some of us are actually discussing Bond dying as an interesting or acceptable story path for the next film. I personally think it's an utterly preposterous idea.
I have said this before: who in the world wants this storyline?
Is there any evidence that there's a massive audience for the death of James Bond? The character has always been aspirational. Men want to be him, women want to be with him. People, in my experience, don't want to see those sorts of heroes killed. There aren't many analogous examples out there, but Sherlock Holmes comes to mind. Holmes can seem to die but what payoff does a viewer get from actually watching him die without the prospect of return? How is that entertaining?
So many of the big movies that are made these days have strong fantasy elements. Superman can die because we know he's not really dead. Spider-man can die in "Infinity War" because we know Tom Holland is signed to do another movie; therefore he can't really be dead. Luke Skywalker will return as a Force ghost.
Bond is different. He is supposed to be a real man in a world not that different from our own.
I could see Craig wanting the death storyline because of the acting challenge. Boyle, I have no idea. Eon, I suppose, might (mis)calculate that it would guarantee interest in that particular movie and whatever they might concoct as a reboot/resurrection.
But viewers? Aside from some people active on forums like this one, and people who aren't fans of the character in the first place, who are they?
(One last thing: in this climate I don't see how you could kill a white male Bond and not receive overwhelming pressure from diversity activists to bring "him" back as a woman or a black man, etc. The backlash would be overwhelmingly negative that Eon had a chance to turn a character associated with white male privilege and chauvinism into a "more inclusive" role model, etc., and they fumbled the opportunity.)
I have little interest in the director, but Sony was narcisistic enough to impose future events onto him. I hope him the best, but am concerned we will get the predictable jail break and Swan revenge.
I think that they know the whole unified field theory backstory pice was a lead Balloon. My guess and hope is that they leave Blofeld fallow for a while and pick it up with the new Bond.
Is Blofeld that compelling of a villain to even bring him back again?
I have little interest in the director, but Sony was narcisistic enough to impose future events onto him. I hope him the best, but am concerned we will get the predictable jail break and Swan revenge.
I think that they know the whole unified field theory backstory pice was a lead Balloon. My guess and hope is that they leave Blofeld fallow for a while and pick it up with the new Bond.
Is Blofeld that compelling of a villain to even bring him back again?
The death of James Bond? Well a lot of that depends on eons intentions with the franchise. As there has been talk of them selling off the rights, perhaps they think killing him off ends it all for them? As the rights will be within the public domain in the not too distant future any other studio wanting to make a bond film doesn't have long to wait, the value eon has is in things such as the gunbarrel, music, iconography etc.
I can't believe some of us are actually discussing Bond dying as an interesting or acceptable story path for the next film. I personally think it's an utterly preposterous idea.
Agreed. But if Craig wants it, you can bet it’s going to happen.
One of the specific and different elements is that never before has an Actor had this much influence. Therefore I would not rule it out. To what extent this has been a good idea is I'm sure something we will debate at length once the dust has settled.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
(One last thing: in this climate I don't see how you could kill a white male Bond and not receive overwhelming pressure from diversity activists to bring "him" back as a woman or a black man, etc. The backlash would be overwhelmingly negative that Eon had a chance to turn a character associated with white male privilege and chauvinism into a "more inclusive" role model, etc., and they fumbled the opportunity.)
This is actually why I think EON will sell, even more than the IP issue. Starting with Goldeneye, they became self-conscious about Bond’s very non-PC roots and felt the need to repeatedly psycho-analyze him in an attempt to “explain” Bond. Skyfall was the culmination of this (with an actual psycho-analysis!), and Spectre felt like a rather weak re-hash. I think EON (Babs) has come to believe that a character like James Bond can’t survive in the #metoo era without a major PC-overhaul, and I don’t think they’re interested in being a part of that.
I can’t blame them, because I’m not interested in that either.
(One last thing: in this climate I don't see how you could kill a white male Bond and not receive overwhelming pressure from diversity activists to bring "him" back as a woman or a black man, etc. The backlash would be overwhelmingly negative that Eon had a chance to turn a character associated with white male privilege and chauvinism into a "more inclusive" role model, etc., and they fumbled the opportunity.)
This is actually why I think EON will sell, even more than the IP issue. Starting with Goldeneye, they became self-conscious about Bond’s very non-PC roots and felt the need to repeatedly psycho-analyze him in an attempt to “explain” Bond. Skyfall was the culmination of this (with an actual psycho-analysis!), and Spectre felt like a rather weak re-hash. I think EON (Babs) has come to believe that a character like James Bond can’t survive in the #metoo era without a major PC-overhaul, and I don’t think they’re interested in being a part of that.
I can’t blame them, because I’m not interested in that either.
Increasingly i am starting to feel that the best option to square the circle and get out of the tight corner is to do Bond in period cold war, sexism the whole shebang. Probably by Netflix with glossy production values and a Flemingeque Bond.
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Once again, I think this is all being overthought. With the Craig films, IMO Bond has transitioned successfully into the modern world. They made something of it in the Brosnan films, in particular Goldeneye. However, other than rumblings in Skyfall regarding Bond being a relic of the past that should have "stayed dead" it just hasn't been an issue, especially in regards to the Craig era Bond's treatment of women. Stop the hand wringing.....Bond 25 is on schedule for Fall 2019; beyond that? Who knows.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 27,757Chief of Staff
If the rights expire or whatever in 2034, then I think they should keep churning out bond films until there's 30 films, then kill him off in Bond 30 instead, and end it there. That is, if they are planning to sell or whatever. Who knows. But 2034 is a while off, so that would leave them time to make it to the nice round number of 30 bond films. Craig ends at Bond 25 with Blofeld being killed in The Garden Of Death. Bonds 26-30 could then be another reboot directed by Nolan (wishful thinking), they could be period pieces like many people want, and they could use all the remaining Fleming titles, with Blofeld returning for one last time in Bond 30. And at the end of all this, there would be a total of 7 007 actors -{
Wishful thinking and OCD on my part I know, but I may aswell dream it up.
(One last thing: in this climate I don't see how you could kill a white male Bond and not receive overwhelming pressure from diversity activists to bring "him" back as a woman or a black man, etc. The backlash would be overwhelmingly negative that Eon had a chance to turn a character associated with white male privilege and chauvinism into a "more inclusive" role model, etc., and they fumbled the opportunity.)
This is actually why I think EON will sell, even more than the IP issue. Starting with Goldeneye, they became self-conscious about Bond’s very non-PC roots and felt the need to repeatedly psycho-analyze him in an attempt to “explain” Bond. Skyfall was the culmination of this (with an actual psycho-analysis!), and Spectre felt like a rather weak re-hash. I think EON (Babs) has come to believe that a character like James Bond can’t survive in the #metoo era without a major PC-overhaul, and I don’t think they’re interested in being a part of that.
I can’t blame them, because I’m not interested in that either.
Increasingly i am starting to feel that the best option to square the circle and get out of the tight corner is to do Bond in period cold war, sexism the whole shebang. Probably by Netflix with glossy production values and a Flemingeque Bond.
I have said this before: who in the world wants this storyline?
Actually, I do.
May I ask why it intrigues you? You moderate a Bond forum so your thoughts about this possible storyline strike me as worth sharing. I am genuinely interested in hearing you.
This is actually why I think EON will sell, even more than the IP issue. Starting with Goldeneye, they became self-conscious about Bond’s very non-PC roots and felt the need to repeatedly psycho-analyze him in an attempt to “explain” Bond. Skyfall was the culmination of this (with an actual psycho-analysis!), and Spectre felt like a rather weak re-hash. I think EON (Babs) has come to believe that a character like James Bond can’t survive in the #metoo era without a major PC-overhaul, and I don’t think they’re interested in being a part of that.
I can’t blame them, because I’m not interested in that either.
Increasingly i am starting to feel that the best option to square the circle and get out of the tight corner is to do Bond in period cold war, sexism the whole shebang. Probably by Netflix with glossy production values and a Flemingeque Bond.
I’m starting to come around to this as well.
Somewhere i read which resonated with me, is that Bond was initially designed to represent the power of the individual, which is the antithesis of communism: the power of the group. I have been researching the four stages of ideological subversion. Everything that has been happening in the political climate has been predicted by the USSR defector Yuri Besmenov in the 80s. It shocked me to the core how accurate he was. Now everyone is either Cis or lgbt or feminist or SJW or male or female or Muslim or Christian, people are no longer judged on individual ideas or actions. Now victim-oppressor mentality can ensue. A reverse psychology strategy seems to be to lose on purpose to play the victim and kill their enemies with oppressor propaganda. Of course in the final stage, the victim ideologues will be the first rounded into the Gulag. It will be a dark day for me when James Bond is hijacked by victim culture (although i believe that has already happened in the Dynamite comics) so I hope EON holds true to their name and holds Bond to his original concept.
Increasingly i am starting to feel that the best option to square the circle and get out of the tight corner is to do Bond in period cold war, sexism the whole shebang. Probably by Netflix with glossy production values and a Flemingeque Bond.
I’m starting to come around to this as well.
Somewhere i read which resonated with me, is that Bond was initially designed to represent the power of the individual, which is the antithesis of communism: the power of the group. I have been researching the four stages of ideological subversion. Everything that has been happening in the political climate has been predicted by the USSR defector Yuri Besmenov in the 80s. It shocked me to the core how accurate he was. Now everyone is either Cis or lgbt or feminist or SJW or male or female or Muslim or Christian, people are no longer judged on individual ideas or actions. Now victim-oppressor mentality can ensue. A reverse psychology strategy seems to be to lose on purpose to play the victim and kill their enemies with oppressor propaganda. Of course in the final stage, the victim ideologues will be the first rounded into the Gulag. It will be a dark day for me when James Bond is hijacked by victim culture (although i believe that has already happened in the Dynamite comics) so I hope EON holds true to their name and holds Bond to his original concept.
Well you did ask :007)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Once again, I think this is all being overthought. With the Craig films, IMO Bond has transitioned successfully into the modern world. They made something of it in the Brosnan films, in particular Goldeneye. However, other than rumblings in Skyfall regarding Bond being a relic of the past that should have "stayed dead" it just hasn't been an issue, especially in regards to the Craig era Bond's treatment of women. Stop the hand wringing.....Bond 25 is on schedule for Fall 2019; beyond that? Who knows.
Over thinking the essentialy trivial is what we do here is it not? Poring over minutae and debating, sometimes even arguing about Bond, his motivation, character, clothes, history purpose...One of my chums is a real Marvel nerd, inexplicable to me (who cares) but deadly serious and fascinating for him engages in fora to a level that I find mind numbing and makes us on AJB seem casual. Takes all sorts I suppose :007)
Of that of which we cannot speak we must pass over in silence- Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/08/high-life-student-becomes-one-of-centre-point-first-residents
It says: "Discussions are also believed to be under way with the director and producers of the 25th James Bond film about including the building in the film, which will be released next year. Suggested scenarios are understood to include having Bond land on the roof via parachute or helicopter."
So, I guess if it is a helicopter that can't be the pre-title sequence as they used a helicopter in SPECTRE's.
I could imagine Boyle wanting London as a 'character' in his film. Somewhat dashes some people's hopes of London being a few minutes of M giving Bond his mission and reinforces the view that London will continue to be a major location for Bond25 just as it has been for Skyfall and Spectre. And maybe Boyle is doing a $90 million budget Bond?
Agree with the stupid backstory....completely unnecessary but I wouldn't worry about it creating problems for Bond 25. New director and screenwriter with very good pedigrees. Lest we not forget, despite the adherence to continuity of the Craig films (Skyfall was a standalone until they decided to connect dots that weren't there in SPECTRE X-( ) Blofeld could easily be out of sight out of mind in Bond 25. I don't see any reason to not give Bond 25 a more than decent chance to be a return to form and worthy entry in the series.
I think that they know the whole unified field theory backstory pice was a lead Balloon. My guess and hope is that they leave Blofeld fallow for a while and pick it up with the new Bond.
That would make the most sense. EON could always reboot Blofeld/SPECTRE in the 2nd or 3rd film of the new Bond's tenure.
Agreed. But if Craig wants it, you can bet it’s going to happen.
I have said this before: who in the world wants this storyline?
Is there any evidence that there's a massive audience for the death of James Bond? The character has always been aspirational. Men want to be him, women want to be with him. People, in my experience, don't want to see those sorts of heroes killed. There aren't many analogous examples out there, but Sherlock Holmes comes to mind. Holmes can seem to die but what payoff does a viewer get from actually watching him die without the prospect of return? How is that entertaining?
So many of the big movies that are made these days have strong fantasy elements. Superman can die because we know he's not really dead. Spider-man can die in "Infinity War" because we know Tom Holland is signed to do another movie; therefore he can't really be dead. Luke Skywalker will return as a Force ghost.
Bond is different. He is supposed to be a real man in a world not that different from our own.
I could see Craig wanting the death storyline because of the acting challenge. Boyle, I have no idea. Eon, I suppose, might (mis)calculate that it would guarantee interest in that particular movie and whatever they might concoct as a reboot/resurrection.
But viewers? Aside from some people active on forums like this one, and people who aren't fans of the character in the first place, who are they?
(One last thing: in this climate I don't see how you could kill a white male Bond and not receive overwhelming pressure from diversity activists to bring "him" back as a woman or a black man, etc. The backlash would be overwhelmingly negative that Eon had a chance to turn a character associated with white male privilege and chauvinism into a "more inclusive" role model, etc., and they fumbled the opportunity.)
One of the specific and different elements is that never before has an Actor had this much influence. Therefore I would not rule it out. To what extent this has been a good idea is I'm sure something we will debate at length once the dust has settled.
This is actually why I think EON will sell, even more than the IP issue. Starting with Goldeneye, they became self-conscious about Bond’s very non-PC roots and felt the need to repeatedly psycho-analyze him in an attempt to “explain” Bond. Skyfall was the culmination of this (with an actual psycho-analysis!), and Spectre felt like a rather weak re-hash. I think EON (Babs) has come to believe that a character like James Bond can’t survive in the #metoo era without a major PC-overhaul, and I don’t think they’re interested in being a part of that.
I can’t blame them, because I’m not interested in that either.
Increasingly i am starting to feel that the best option to square the circle and get out of the tight corner is to do Bond in period cold war, sexism the whole shebang. Probably by Netflix with glossy production values and a Flemingeque Bond.
Actually, I do.
Wishful thinking and OCD on my part I know, but I may aswell dream it up.
1 - Moore, 2 - Dalton, 3 - Craig, 4 - Connery, 5 - Brosnan, 6 - Lazenby
I’m starting to come around to this as well.
May I ask why it intrigues you? You moderate a Bond forum so your thoughts about this possible storyline strike me as worth sharing. I am genuinely interested in hearing you.
Somewhere i read which resonated with me, is that Bond was initially designed to represent the power of the individual, which is the antithesis of communism: the power of the group. I have been researching the four stages of ideological subversion. Everything that has been happening in the political climate has been predicted by the USSR defector Yuri Besmenov in the 80s. It shocked me to the core how accurate he was. Now everyone is either Cis or lgbt or feminist or SJW or male or female or Muslim or Christian, people are no longer judged on individual ideas or actions. Now victim-oppressor mentality can ensue. A reverse psychology strategy seems to be to lose on purpose to play the victim and kill their enemies with oppressor propaganda. Of course in the final stage, the victim ideologues will be the first rounded into the Gulag. It will be a dark day for me when James Bond is hijacked by victim culture (although i believe that has already happened in the Dynamite comics) so I hope EON holds true to their name and holds Bond to his original concept.
Well you did ask :007)
Over thinking the essentialy trivial is what we do here is it not? Poring over minutae and debating, sometimes even arguing about Bond, his motivation, character, clothes, history purpose...One of my chums is a real Marvel nerd, inexplicable to me (who cares) but deadly serious and fascinating for him engages in fora to a level that I find mind numbing and makes us on AJB seem casual. Takes all sorts I suppose :007)